The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

‘ WEDNESDAY. SEPTEMBER 28, 2011 0 WATERLOO, ONTARIO * $1 INCLUDING HST , L O O ' Citywfll "5" ~ “ . . ‘ .> f ' "44/ a; 3-1.. . ‘ . . ' ' ' 2* r2. _. . . . renew f 41 I... ! aff ' ' lit“ l .. ( R ‘ . ‘ x St wages ~ «3’? , , .. » \ Q m . _ . ' 1': i , ‘ v ”'9 . ‘ ‘ "- BYPAIGE Dmono " ‘ ‘ « a) t l Chronicle Staff .., " > , ’4‘. - l â€"â€"_â€"._ . y " -. l iry of Waterloo staff benefits will be ’ S " - “ , ' . 3: included in the city's gauge of ‘ « .. . proper compensation for employ» ., ART ,‘ d‘ t d'_' Md'r .‘ . . D . 1 Efgmatcor mg 0 a ecision on a) A; Q Culture ’ (Iity council approved a consultant's l ’ . ‘ ‘2. ‘. ‘ Page24 ‘ repon measuring the salaries of city staff ~. ‘i ‘ _ l against other municipalities, but ques- ; ‘ ' . ’ tioned why benefits weren't included in F t the comparison. ‘ ' ' ' (inun. Scott Winner said comparing l _ 5 ' ' salaries only did not give a hill picture of ‘ ‘ | ‘ what staff receive. K 3.. A i a l I “I think this (report) gives us a very _ - if? V 1 small picture of whether our comparison " ,, ‘ ' is fair or not," Witmer said. ”It's half the _ ‘ . {a ‘ puzzle." » J ‘ ‘ Karen Boa. who presented the report. . g f f; j said only salaries were included based on ' ‘ \ ' .. “ ’ past policy and past practice. ‘ l To be included in the updated report , ‘ l will be stall“ sick days. benefits and vaca- -; tion time. a a The last survey was conducted in . ‘ , 200T; w . , . . LIFESTYLE e survey compares ater oos , ’ employee compensation to other munic- ‘ ‘ 7,. ' Local teen part Of l ipalities based on comparable factors . I? Y'I’Vreafityshow l such as population size. number of .3“! 3 z . Page 14 l employees. operating budget. Similarity ‘ ‘ .3- ' , - . of services, geographic proximity and l {‘1 - - ‘ A | labour market talent competitiveness. I ; I in the most recent study Waterloo was 4 l ' 3 . j compared to 10 cities including Guelph. . 7 3' . " ; (Lamhridge. Brantford Oshawa and Bar» . , t \ : rie. , ’ .' ' 9- '1 ‘ \ ; ‘ I The comparators gauge the City's ahll' - g . ‘ l‘\ 1 ' ‘ Ity to attract and retain employees. a f :1” ' "‘ ‘ t ‘ 1 through a comparison with competitor . ' 1 ‘ l ‘ I municipalities. i fi' I A A k Q .‘ ‘ . Waterloo's goal is to keep salaries in ”Munro 1. the r)(lth percentile 1‘ Up to tile challenge? a , Stall will return to rounctl for any for , . . , , , . "I” funds required to expand the “up? The Waterloo Region chapter of the Canadian Paraplegic'Association held their annual Wheelchair chal: ‘ it} _ ‘ . It 11. r _ N rt lenge relay in the Waterloo public square last Saturday; Kiran Chauhan, a member of the Optionators tries i ” S“ En?" _ ‘n 8k fl ’ ‘ _ | . ,0 _ to balance a few add ons in the tricky obstacle course meant to simulate the challenges of people in ‘ ‘ ta ““3” ma ‘ ill) mu" ‘ "m " I“ r wheekhairs More than 122 people attended the event. including city council, raising $24,000. . . . rent of the i "3' s operating budget 7,, - AM“ #77 Hi .i.,,. .__,_. I B _ 51m Can "We ’Malw ‘ has WINDOW worms 1 it Come in today and be Inspired With all the MARVIN‘& A ‘ ". s latest Morvrn hoslo otter w ‘ n d o w 5 a n a D a a ' S 4' s 2 2236 Shirley Drive. Kitchener . ' C M . 99.575393; Built around you. ._ ' www.bavorlanwlndows.com "imminent ‘7 ‘ ' W